36 


A   AVORD   IN    PASSING. 


"Very  true,  sir,"  was  the  triumphant  reply 
of  Mr.  Kincaid,  a  reply  "which  none  but  a 
Baptist  could  have  made,  "  very  true,  there 
is  no  Divine  authority  for  infant  baptism,  it 
is  based  only  on  tradition^  and  so  /  reject  it 
altogether.  Infant  baptism  is  the  offspring 
of  a  Judaizing  spirit,  and  betrays  great  igno- 
rance of  the  true  character  of  a  Christian 
church, — through  its  influence  whole  nations, 
without  reference  to  character,  are  brought 
into  the  church.  I  regard  infant  baptism,  in 
its  practice  or  tendency,  as  one  of  the  worst 
dogmas  of  Popery.  Let  it  be  taken  from  the 
system,  and  believers'  baptism  be  restored, 
and  the  whole  superstructure  of  Rome  will 
crumble  dovm." 

The  Jesuit  priest  soon  found  that  he  had 
more  than  his  match  in  the  unpretending  Bap- 
tist minister,  whom  he  had  striven  to  convert 
to  the  dogmas  of  Rome;  and  that  it  was  no  use 
arguing  longer  with  one  who  denied  in  toto 
the  authority  of  tradition,  and  built  his  faith 
upon  the  Bible  only  ;  and  therefore,  with 
liis  dark  piercing  eyes  flashing  inquisitorial 
fire,  he  retired  from  the  controversy,  leaving 
Mr.  Kincaid  to  his  own  reflections. 


reply 
but   a, 

there 
ism,  it 
ject  it 
spring 
;  igno- 
ristian 
itions, 
'ought 
sm,  in 

worst 
»m  the 
stored, 
le  will 


le  had 
I  Bap- 
onvert 
no  use 
n  toto 
s  faith 
,  with 
litorial 
eaving 


|l0me  Hgamst  % 


AND  THE  BIBLE  AGAINST 

Or,  Pharisaism,  Je-wish 

BY  WM.  S.  PLUMER,  D. 
18mo.     129  pages.     FRICS  25 


Frtym  the  Christian  Chronich 

"  This  little  volume  is  from  the  pen  of  a  mc 
plished  scholar.  Dr.  Plumer,  of  Baltimore,  ha 
an  impressive  preacher,  or  a  vigorous  writer, 
home  with  the  nature,  history,  and  results  of 
and  in  this  book  has  presented  the  subject  be 
masterly  manner.  It  will  d*  good  in  the  fai 
in  the  Sabbath  School  Library." 

From  the  Ohristian  Secretary 

"  It  shows  in  a  clear  and  precise  manner,  wl 
among  the  Jews,  and  that  Pharisaism  amor 
beyond  it.  It  also  shows  the  hostility  of  po 
circulation  of  the  Word  of  God — that  this  oj: 
tural  and  unreasonable,  and  is  condemned 
antiquity.  It  concludes  with  an  address  to 
private  members  of  the  Romish  church,  and  1 

From  the  New  York  Baptist  Reg 

"  The  writer  shows  clearly  that  Catholics 
favorable  to  the  Douay  version  than  to  any  o 
opposition  is  to  the  Bible  itself." 

From  the  Presbyterian  Banm 

"This  little  volume  is  admirably  condens 
solid  matter  in  the  author's  usual  effective  i: 
repay  the  labor  of  several  perusals." 

From  the  Presbyterian. 

"The  kind  of  book  which  should  be  plac 
general  readers,  who  wish  to  ascertain  th 
Popery. 

From  the  Episcopal  Recorde 

"  A  succinct  and  able  compendium  of  the 
the  important  topic  its  title  indicates." 

4    ^   •   »    > 

118  ARCH  STREET.  PIIILABEl 


igamst  t\t 


IE  BIBLE  AGAINST  ROME: 

Ism,  Je-wish    and  Papal. 

WM.  S.  PLUMER,  D.  D. 

29  pages.     PRICE  25  CENTS.  ' 


rom  the  Christian  Chronicle, 

le  is  from  the  pen  of  a  moat  able  and  accom- 
.  Plumer,  of  Baltimore,  has  but  few  equals  as 
her,  or  a  vigorous  writer.  lie  is  entirely  at 
re,  history,  and  results  of  the  papal  religion, 
1  presented  the  subject  before  the  public  in  a 
[t  will  d'  good  in  the  family,  and  especially 
ol  Library." 
rom  the  Christian  Secretary. 

ar  and  precise  manner,  what  Pharisaism  was 
nd  that  Pharisaism  among  the  Papists  goes 
shows  the  hostility  of  popery  to  the  general 
Vord  of  God — that  this  opposition  is  unscrip- 
lable,  and  is  condemned  by  the  voice  of 
udes  with  an  address  to  Romish  priests,  to 
the  Romish  church,  and  to  Protestants." 

,  the  New  York  Baptist  Register. 

ns  clearly  that  Catholics  are  scarcely  more 
lay  version  than  to  any  other,  and  that  their 
Bible  itself." 

•om  the  Presbyterian  Banner. 

me  is  admirably  condensed,  and  filled  with 
author's  usual  effective  manner.  *  *  It  will 
everal  perusals." 

From  the  Presbyterian. 

lok  which  should  be  placed  in  the  hands  of 
ho  wish  to  ascertain  the  true  features  of 

^rom  the  Episcopal  Recorder. 

able  compendium  of  the  Protestant  view  on 

;  its  title  indicates." 


\C,\\  STREET.  PHILABELPTTIA. 


8 


A   WORD   IN   PASSING. 


found  In  the  church  of  Home  all  those  charac- 
teristics which  the  apostle  John  attributes,  to 
her,  in  the  seventeenth  chapter  of  the  Revela- 
tion, and  that  in  the  following  chapter  you 
have  found  a  command  to  go  out  from  Baby- 
lon, "  that  ye  be  not  partakers  of  her  sins, 
and  that  ye  receive  not  of  her  plagues." 

It  is,  then,  an  established  and  admitted  fact, 
that  because  the  Romish  church  "  has  made  the 
word  of  God  of  none  eifect  by  her  traditions" 
— Matt.  XV.  6 — because  she  "teaches  for  doc- 
trines the  commandments  of  men" — v.  9 — be- 
cause she  has  dared  to  suppress  the  second 
commandment  of  the  decalogue,  and  has  falsi- 
fied the  sacraments  of  the  New  Testament,  you 
have  abandoned  her^  as  adding  to  the  word  of 
God,  and  taking  from  it,  just  as  she  finds  it 
convenient.     You   have  called   to  mind  also 
what  Jesus  has  declared  at  the  close  of  the 
sacred  volume:    "I  testify  unto   every  man 
that  heareth  the  woids  of  the  prophecy  of  this 
book,  if  any  man  shall  add  unto  these  things, 
God  shall  add  unto  him  the  plagues  that  are 
written  in  this  book ;   and  if  any  man  shall 
take  away  from  the  words  of  the  book  of  this 
Drophecy,  God  shall  take  away  his  part  out 


I 


A   WORD   IN   PASSING. 


charac- 
ntei^  to 
Revela- 
ber  you 
L  Baby- 

3r  sins, 

ft 

ed  fact, 
ade  the 
iitions" 
for  doc- 
9— be- 
second 
,s  falsi- 
nt,  1/ou 
'ord  of 
inds  it 
id  also 
of  the 
J  man 
of  this 
things, 
at  are 
I  shall 
)f  this 
rt  out 


I 


of  the  book  of  life,  and  out  of  the  holy  city, 
and  from  the  things  which  are  written  in  this 
book."     Rev.  xxii. — 18,  19. 

In  short,  it  is  because  the  church  of  Rome 
is  not  based  upon  the  word  of  God  ;  because 
she  rejects  and  conceals  that  word,  that  you 
have  separated  yourselves  from  her. 

Let  me  now  ask  you  one  question.  Do  you 
believe  that  the  church  of  Rome  is  in  reality 
such  as  we  have  just  described  her  to  be? 
that  she  possesses  ail  the  marks  and  characters 
of  "•  the  man  of  sin,  the  son  of  perdition," 
of  that  Antichrist  who  teaches  the  doctrines  of 
devils, — of  "  the  great  whore," — of  the  woman 
"  arrayed  in  purple  and  scarlet  color,  and 
decked  with  gold,  and  precious  stones,  and 
pearls,"  who  has  "upon  her  forehead  a  name 
written  Mystery,  Babylon  the  great,  mo- 
ther OF  HARLOTS,  AND  ABOMINATIONS  OF  THE 

EARTH?"  Rev.  xvii.,  4,  5.  If  you  believe  all 
these  things,  you  have  done  well  to  come 
forth,  without  longer  delay,  from  a  church 
which  you  recognize  as  possessing  all  the  cha- 
racteristics of  the  enemy  of  God.  You  are 
then   placed   upon   the   solid   ground  of  the 


A   WORD   IN    PASSING. 

Bible,  and  all  those  who  love  tlie  word  of  God 
cannot  but  rejoice  at  your  noble  resolution. 

But  I  have  still  another  question  to  propose 
to  you.  It  is  this :  Do  you  wish  to  be  consis- 
tent with  the  declarations  you  have  just  made  ? 
If  so,  then  I  beseech  you  to  examine,  yet  once 
more,  the  three  passages  of  scripture  which  I 
have  placed  at  the  beginning  of  this  treatise. 
You  recognize  them  to  be  a  portion  of  the 
word  of  God.  At  the  same  time,  if,  as  I 
doubt  not,  you  are  sincere  in  the  opinion 
which  you  share,  in  relation  to  the  church  of 
Rome,  then  she  must  be  regarded  by  you  as 
Antichrist,  as  Belial — in  a  word,  as  opposed  to 
the  word  of  God.  She  must  be  that  kingdom 
which  opposeth  all  that  is  God,  "  that  man  of 
sin,  who  exalteth  himself  above  all  that  is  called 
God,"  wishing  himself  to  pass  for  God. 

Now,  I  ask  you,  what  fellowship  can  there 
be  between  Jesus  Christ  and  Belial  ?  I  ask, 
if  we  can  belong  to  the  church  or  visible  king 
dom  of  Jesus  Christ  here  upon  earth,  and  at 
the  same  time  belong  to  a  system  which  is 
directly  contrary  to  him  ?  I  ask  if  we  can 
drink  of  the  cup  of  the  Lord,  and  at  the  same 
time  that  of  devils  ?     Certainly  not,  you  an- 


I 


A   WORD   IN   PASSING. 


11 


of  God 
tion. 
propose 
consis- 
made  ? 
et  once 
^hich  I 
reatise. 
of  the 
r,  as  I 
opinion 
irch  of 
you  as 
osed  to 
ingdom 
man  of 
3  called 

n  there 
I  ask, 
e  king 
and  at 
hich  is 
we  can 
e  same 
ou  an- 


I 


swer  me.  It  is  then  a  well  settled  fact  with 
you,  that  there  can  be  no  alliance,  no  affinity 
whatsoever  between  the  church  of  Jesus  Christ 
and  that  of  Antichrist. 

If  the  assertion  which  has  just  been  made 
is  true — and  I  believe  it  with  my  whole  heart 
— it  remains  for  me  to  propose  yet  another 
question  to  you  :  Is  it  lawful  in  going  out  of 
the  church  of  Rome,  for  a  person  to  retain 
any  of  her  false  traditions  ?  Does  not  the 
Bible  command  us  to  come  out  from  Babylon, 
in  order  that  we  "  be  not  partakers  of  her  sins, 
and  receive  not  of  her  plagues  ?"  The  tradi- 
tion which  makes  void  the  word  of  God,  is  it 
not  a  sin  ?  Now  tell  me  whence  Home  has 
taken  her  infant  baptism  ? 

Upon  this  point  she  herself  is  frank.  Listen 
to  what,  upon  this  subject,  says  Rev.  Father 
Sheffmacher  in  his  "  Manual  of  Controversy." 
"  We  find  in  no  part  of  the  Scripture  that  it 
is  necessary  to  baptize  infants."  Page  48. 
"  We  find  no  example  in  Scripture  by  which 
we  can  see  that  infants  ever  were  baptized." 
Page  59.  *' Jesus  Christ  and  the  apostles 
baptized  by  immersion."  Page  76.  *'The 
Catholics   prove  the   baptism    of  infants  by 


--am 

9 


12 


A   WORD   IN   PASSING. 


TRADITION."  Page  119.  You  have  it,  then, 
dear  reader,  that  the  baptism  of  infants,  is 
nothing  else  than  a  tradition,  -which  the 
church  of  Rome  invented  in  the  third  century 
— that  is  to  say — more  than  two  hundred 
years  after  the  death  of  Jesus  Christ. 

The  Scriptures  prove  to  us,  as  clearly  as 
possible,  that  baptism  was  administered  to  the 
believer  only,  who  was  buried  in  the  water, 
in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Trinity.  They  do 
not  say  one  word  of  the  baptism  of  infants, 
which  is  a  comparatively  recent  invention. 
The  date  of  the  ceremony  of  pouring  water 
on  an  infant,  in  order  to  baptize  it,  can  easily 
be  discovered.  This  then  is  another  tradition, 
which  makes  void  the  commandment  of  God. 

Where  are  you  then,  dear  friends  ?  Are 
you  still  following  the  traditions  and  the  doc- 
trines of  men  ?  And  yet,  w^as  it  not  with  this 
express  design  that  you  went  out  from  the 
church  of  Rome,  in  order  that  you  migRt  no 
longer  be  subject  to  the  commandments   of 


men? 


But  I  wish  to  continue  my  argument  with 
you  yet  a  little  further.  I  suppose  for  a 
moment — observe,  it  is  only  a  supposition — 


I 

i 


■m 


A  WORD   IN   PASSING. 


IB 


k,  then, 
ants,  is 
ch  the 
3enturv 
.undred 

uirly  as 
I  to  the 
water, 
hey  do 
infants, 
'^ention. 
5  water 
n  easily 
addition, 
f  God. 
?  Are 
the  doc- 
rith.  this 
om  the 
ight  no 
3nts   of 

jnt  with 
)  for  a 
sition — 


that  the  baptism  of  infants  is  proper.  Still  I 
ask,  how  can  you  say  that  the  church  of  Rome, 
^Yhich  according  to  you,  is  no  church  of  Jesus 
Christ,  has  the  right  to  administer  the  ordi- 
nances of  Jesus  Christ  ?  "  Is  there  any  con- 
cord between  Christ  and  Belial?"  ''Can 
you  drink  the  cup  of  the  Lord  and  the  cup  of 

devils?*' 

We  must  be  honest  and  candid.  Either 
the  church  of  Rome  is  the  church  of  Jesu". 
Christ,  and  then  she  has  the  right  to  admin- 
ister the  ordinances  of  baptism  and  the  supper 
—and  in  this  case  you  and  I  have  done  wrong 
to  leave  her— or  else  she  is  not.  If  she  is 
not  the  church  of  Jesus  Christ,  she  has  no 
right  to  administer  the  ordinances,  and  con- 
sequently you  have  never  been  baptized. 

Consider  attentively  what  I  say  to  you, 
and  you  will  see  that  it  is  not  easy  to  refute 
this  reasoning.  But  the  scripture  teaches  us 
that  the  church  of  Rome  is  not  the  church  of 
Jesus  Christ.  They  also  tell  us  that  there  is 
but  "one  baptism,"  Eph.  iv.  5;  and  that 
this  baptism  is  the  burial  of  the  Christian  in 
the  baptismal  waters,  as  Jesus  was  buried  in 
those  of  Jordan,  Matt.  iii.  16 ;  as  the  eunuch 


A   WORD   IN   PASSING. 

also  was,  Acts  viii.  38 ;  as  the  apostle  Paul 
and  the  Eomans  also  were,  Rom.  vi.  3,  4  ; 
as  the  Colossians  were,  Col.  ii.  12 ;  in  a  word, 
as  all  Christians  were  in  the  time  of  the 
apostles.  They  did  not  make  void  the  com- 
mandments of  God  by  their  tradition,  but  like 
the  Samaritans,  "when  they  believed  they 
were  baptized,  both  men  and  women."  Acts, 
viii.  12. 

I  appeal,  then,  to  your  conscience  and  your 
good  sense.  Where  is  infant  baptism  to  be 
found  in  the  Scriptures  ?  Certainly  you  are 
not  able  to  point  out  a  single  passage,  which 
says  that  new-born  babes  should  be  baptized. 
It  is  nothing  else  but  a  miserable  tradition, 
which  the  church  of  England,  and  that  of 
Calvin  and  that  of  Luther  have  retained 
aruong  the  numerous  relics  of  popery,  which 
they  carried  out  from  the  church  of  Rome, 
when  they  separated  from  her. 

As  for  you,  well-beloved,  to  whom  I  address 
myself,  reject  all  those  precepts,  which  are 
founded  only  upon  "  the  commandments  and 
doctrines  of  men."  Col.  ii.  22.  Keep  to  the 
pure  word  of  God,  and  since  you  have  honestly 
and  in  good  faith,  gone  out  from  the  Romish 


A  WORD   IN   PASSING. 


15 


tie  Paul 
vl  3,  4  ; 
a  word, 
i  of  the 
he  com- 
but  like 
ed  they 
Acts, 

nd  your 
[n  to  be 
you  are 
5,  which 
aptized. 
-adition, 
that  of 
retained 
7,  which 
Eome, 

address 
ich  are 
tnts  and 
p  to  the 
lonestly 
Romish 


church,  because  she  holds  to  traditions  in- 
^      stead  of  the  commandments  of  God,  abandon 
all  these  traditions,  even  to  the  very  least. 

Hearken  to  what  the  apostle  Peter  said  to 
the  Jews  who  acknowledged  their  sins,  and 
wished  to  be  reconciled  to  God, — "  Repent 
and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in  the 
name  of  Jesus  Christ  for  the  remission  of  sins, 
and  ye  shaU  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost."  Acts  ii.  38.  Hear  what  the  same 
f  apostle  says  to  Cornelius  and  his  friends, — 
^  "  Can  any  man  forbid  water  that  these  should 
not  be  baptized,  w'ho  have  received  the  Holy 
Ghost  as  well  as  we  ?  And  he  commanded 
them  to  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord." 
Acts  X.,  47,  48.  See  what  Philip  says  to  the 
eunuch  who  asked  of  him  baptism.  "  If  thou 
believest  with  all  thine  heart  thou  may  est." 
Acts  viii.  37.  Hearken  to  what  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  himself  said,  when  he  gave  his 
commission  to  his  apostles,  "•  Go  ye  into  all  the 
world,  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every  crea- 
ture ;  he  that  believeth  and  is  baptized,  shall 
De  saved."     Mark  xvi.  15,  16. 

Every  where  faith  precedes  baptism.     But 
the  Church  of  Rome  amonf^r  her  numerous  and 


A   WORD   IN    PASSING. 


sacrilegious  innovations,  has  ordained  that  i^ 
is  not  necessary  to  wait  in  order  that  faith 
may  precede  ;  and  in  her  temerity  she  ha? 
reversed  the  order  which  Jesus  Christ  ha.*' 
established. 

Faith^  and  then  baptism: — such  was  the 
command  of  the  sovereign  legislator  of  the 
Christian  church. 

'Let  us  begin  with  baptism— faith  may 
come  when  it  can,'  says  Antichrist,  the  man 
of  sin,  the  modern  Babylon,  the  church  of 
Rome. 

And  yet,  it  is  a  lamentable  fa  t,  that  cer- 
tain churches  which  protest  against  the  tradi- 
tions  of  Rome,  have  nevertheless  received  this 
error  from  that  very  church  which  they  repu- 
diate  on  account  of  her  traditions. 

Rome  in  her  folly  and  its  blindness,  has 
perverted  the  two  ordinances  of  baptism  and 
the  supper,  both  of  which  she  administered  to 
infants  up  to  the  council  of  Trent,  when  she 
ceased  the  practice  of  administering  the  com- 
munion to  them,  but  continued  to  administer 
baptism.  Certain  protestant  churches,  such 
as  that  of  Lutl.-r  in  Germany,  that  of  Calvin, 
which  is  the  Presbyterian  church  of  Switzer- 


II 


A  WORD   IN    PASSING. 


17 


that  {*■ 
it  faith 
ihe  hap 
ist    hiXF 

ras  the 
of  the 

li  may 
0  man 
rch  of 

it  cer- 

tradi- 

3d  this 

'  repu- 

s,  has 
m  and 
red  to 
sn  she 
)  com- 
nister 
such 
alvin, 
itzer- 


land  and  France,  that  of  Henry  YIII.,  which 
is  the  church  of  England,  have  had  the  weak- 
ness to  retain  this  tradition  of  the  mother  of 
abominations. 

Believe  me,  this  custom  of  baptizing  infants 
has  no  other  authority  whatever  than  the 
tradition  of  that  very  church  which  you  have 
just  abandoned,  because,  by  her  tradition  she 
makes  void  the  word  of  God, 

Is  it  your  desire,  then,  to  retain  ant/  of  the 
relics  of  popery  ?  Why  turn  your  back  upon 
Rome  at  all,  if  you  wish  still  to  retain  some  one 
of  her  traditions  ?  Can  you  drink  the  cup  of 
the  Lord  and  the  cup  of  Rome  at  the  same 
time  ?  Can  you  partake  of  the  table  of  the 
Lord  and  the  table  of  Rome  at  the  same  time  ? 
Can  there  be  any  agreement  between  Jesus 
Christ,  who  has  commanded  the  baptism  of 
the  believer  by  immersion,  upon  a  public  pro- 
fession of  faith  in  his  name,  and  the  church 
of  Rome  which  has  established  the  baptism  of 
infants  by  sprinkling,  in  order  that  they  may 
be  regenerated  by  that  baptism,  and  become 
members  of  the  church,  by  entering  into  the 
covenant  of  Abraham,  which  no  longer  exists  ? 
Can  you  consistently  approve  of  those  pro 


(H* 


18 


A   WORD   IN   PASSING. 


testant  churches,  which  have  separated  them- 
selves from  the  church  of  Rome  on  account 
of  her  traditions,  and  which  have  notwith- 
standing retained  infant  baptism,  which  owes 
its  origin  only  to  the  will  and  false  views 
of  that  very  church  which  they  reject,  on 
account  of  her  traditions  ? 

No  Romish  priest  is  afraid  to  meet  and  dis- 
cuss this  subject  with  a  protestant  minister 
who  admits  infant  baptism,  because  he  can 
make  that  minister  contradict  him.self  when- 
ever he  chooses.  Not  so  with  him  who  admin- 
isters baptism  by  immersion  to  believers  only.* 

The  priest  knows  that  Jesus  Christ  and 
his  apostles  baptized  all  those  who  believed 
by  plunging  them  in  the  water ;  and  he  knows 
also  that  it  is  his  own  church  which  has  esta- 
blished the  baptism  of  infants.  He  does  not 
dare  therefore,  to  attack  the  servant  of  God 
upon  this  point,  for  he  knows  that  the  latter 
has  the  holy  scriptures  to  sustain  his  baptism. 

*  A  striking  instance  of  the  advantage  of  a  Baptist 
over  a  Pedobaptist  in  reasoning  with  a  Romish  priest, 
IS  furnished  in  the  conversation  between  Rev.  Eugenio 
Kincaid  and  a  priest,  which  we  have  inserted  at  the  close 
of  this  tract. 


■■ 


A   WORD    IN   PASSING. 


19 


td  them- 
account 
notwith- 
ch  owes 
56  views 
sject,  on 

and  dis- 
minister 
he  can 
f  when- 
•  admin- 
s  only.* 
ist   and 
believed 
3  knows 
as  esta- 
tes not 
of  God 
e  latter 
aptism. 

I  Baptist 

h  priest, 

Eugenio 

the  close 


The  Scriptures  tell  us  that  we  ought  to 
"  be  ready  always  to  give  an  answer  to  every 
man,  a  reason  of  the  hope  that  is  in  us,  with 
meekness  and  fear."     1  Pet.  iii.  15. 

Now  suppose  that  while  you  are  having 
your  infant  baptized  by  one  of  your  ministers, 
a  priest  of  the  church  of  Rome  enters  the 
place  where  you  are. 

He  sees  you  bring  your  child  to  be  bap- 
tized ;  he  says  to  himself,  "  that  is  well,  it  is 
just  as  we  do.'* 

He  sees  your  minister  pour  water  upon  the 
head  of  the  child ;  he  says  again,  *'  that  is 
good,  it  is  just  as  we  do." 

He  sees  again  that  you  give  a  name  to  your 
child  ;  and  he  says  once  more,  "  all  this  is 
very  good  indeeh,  it  is  just  as  we  do.* 

If  you  are  an  Anglican,  or  a  Swiss  or 
French  Presbyterian,  he  sees  a  god-father  and 
a  god-mother,  who  solemnly  engage  that  the 
child  shall  be  brought  up  in  the  Christian 
faith ;  and  the  priest  says,  "  why,  all  this  is 
right ;  it  is  really  equal  to  what  is  done  by 
us  catholics !" 

Astonished  to  see  so  much  similarity  between 
his  church,  which  you  have  abandoned,  and 


20 


A   WORD   IX   PASSING. 


that  church  which  you  hnve  just  chosen,  he 
asks  wherefore  you  have  separated  yourselves 
from  the  ancient  mother  church,  which  couhl 
have  baptized  your  child  just  as  well  as  your 
own  minister. 

You  reply  to  him,  that  it  is  because  you 
have  discovered  that  the  church  of  Rome 
makes  void  the  commandments  of  God  by  her 
tradition. 

Hereupon  the  priest  asks,  "  is  it  true  that 
you  have  resolved  to  reject  all  tradition,  and 
to  hold  to  nothing  but  the  Bible  onhj  r  You 
reply  in  the  affirmative. 

Then  the  priest,  without  any  hesitation, 
immediately  appeals  to  the  word  of  God  that 
you  should  point  out  to  him  one  single  pas- 
sage, which  authorises  the  baptism  of  infants. 

You  hesitate  no  longer ;  you  tell  him  that 
Jesus  has  said,  "  Suffer  the  little  children  to 
come  unto  me,  and  forbid  them  not."  The 
priest  replies,  "  Jesus  did  not  baptize  them ; 
he  only  blessed  them.'* 

You  quote  to  him  the  words  of  Peter,  "  the 
promise  is  unto  you  and  to  your  children." 
Acts  ii.  39.  He  replies  that  this  promise  is 
that  of  the  Holy  Spirit,   which  infants  are 


m 


m 


A  WORD    IN    PASSING. 


21 


)sen,  he 
irselves 
h  could 
as  your 

Lise  you 

Rome 

by  her 

ue  that 
m,  and 

iOU 

tation, 
d  that 
'e  pas- 
ifants. 
n  that 
ren  it 
The 
them; 

"  the 
Iren/' 
fiise  is 


« 


incapable  of  receiving  ;  and,  moreover,  that 
the  word  "  children"  does  not  always  signify 
in  the  Bible,  infavtSy  but  posterity ,  descend- 
ants. 

Pursuing  the  subject  further,  you  tell  him 
that  the  household  of  Lydia,  of  the  Philippian 
jailor,  of  Crispus  and  Stephanus  were  bap- 
tized, and  that  probably  there  were  infants 
among  the  persons  baptized.  But  the  priest 
proves  to  you  from  the  Scripture  that,  in  the 
household  of  Lydia  they  were  "brethren," 
Acts  xvi.,  40;  that  the  jailer  "rejoiced,  be- 
lieving in  God,  with  all  his  house":that  Crispus 
also  "believed  on  the  Lord  with  all  his  house, 
Acts  xviii.,  8  ;  and  that  the  household  of  Ste- 
phanus "  addicted  themselves  to  the  ministry 
of  the  saints."     1  Cor.  xvi.,  15. 

Defeated  again  on  this  point,  you  tell  him 
that  baptism  comes  in  the  place  of  circum- 
cision ;  and  as,  under  the  Abrahamic  covenant, 
infants  were  circumcised,  so  the  infants  of 
Christians  ought  to  be  baptized.  The  priest 
answers  you,  that  if  baptism  takes  the  place 
of  circumcision,  then  that  ordinance  should 
be  administered  only  to  the  same  class  of 
individuals   as    those   to    whom   circumcision 


22 


A   WORD    IX    PASSING. 


I 


was  administered.  Accordingly  hoys  onl^ 
ought  to  be  baptized  ;  and  when  a  father  of 
a  family  is  converted,  his  servants  and  slaves, 
if  he  has  any,  even  if  they  are  not  believers, 
ought  to  be  baptized,  whether  they  consent 
to  it  or  not ;  because  such  was  the  law  of  cir- 
cumcision. Furthermore,  the  priest  shows 
you  by  the  apostle's  own  words,  that  the  cove- 
nant of  Abraham  exists  no  longer,  but  that 
we  have  a  better  covenant  in  Jesus  Christ. 

The  last  argument  to  which  you  have  re- 
course is  that  of  the  holiness  of  the  infant, 
1  Cor.  vii.  14.  The  priest,  however,  gives 
you  no  rest  here,  but  shows  you  that  the  holi- 
ness to  which  allusion  is  there  made,  is  a  civil 
holiness,  that  is  to  say,  that  the  children  of 
the  Corinthians  to  whom  the  apostle  Paul 
addressed  himself,  were  born  in  the  ties  of 
marriage,  and  were  therefore  legitimate. 

Beaten  upon  all  these  points,  you  perceive 
that  theie  remains  not  one  solid  argument  by 
which  you  can  defend  your  infant  baptism. 

Then  the  priest  of  Rome  says  to  you,  "you 
have  turned  your  back  upon  us,  because  we 
teach  traditions,  and  we  do  not  deny  that 
such  is  the  case.     We  are  honest  in  acknow- 


I 


A  WORD  IX    PASSING. 


23 


}  onl^ 
her  of 
slaves, 
ievers, 
3nsent 
of  cir- 
shows 
B  cove- 
it  that 
"ist. 

ive  re- 
infant, 
,  gives 
le  holi- 
a  civil 
ren  of 
e  Paul 
ties  of 


erceive 
ent  by 
ism. 
,  "you 
I  use  we 
ly  that 
,cknow- 


■       I  edging  that   we  have  taught  you  traditions. 

W  Your  minister  will  not  be  as  frank  as  I  am. 
But  tell  me,  if  you  please, — you  who  are 
determined  no  longer  to  follow  traditions — 
are  you  able  to  deny  that  it  was  the  church 
of  Rome  who  introduced  infant  baptism  to- 
wards the  middle  or  end  of  the  third  century, 
and  who  sanctioned  and  approved  it,  at  one 
of  her  councils,  two  centuries  after  she  had 
invented  it  ?  Yon  say  that  you  no  longer 
desire  to  belong  to  the  Romish  church,  because 
she  teaches  traditions ;  and  yet,  in  baptizing 
your  child,  you  continue  still  to  practise  a 
tradition  established  by  our  church." 

Such  would  be  the  way  in  which  a  Romish 
priest  would  reason  with  those  who  leave  his 
church  in  order  to  hold  to  the  simple  word  of 
God,  and  who  yet  retain  the  tradition  of 
infant  baptism. 

Can  you  serve  two  masters  at  once  ?  Can 
you  hold  to  the  Bible  and  to  tradition  at  the 
same  time?  If  you  admit  the  tradition  of 
infant  baptism,  why  not  admit  the  tradition 
of  administering  the  communion  under  one 
kind  only,  as  the  church  of  Rome  now  does  ? 
Why  not  ^ive  the  communion  to  infants,  as 


24 


A   WORD   IN    PASSING. 


the  cliurcli  of  Rome  did  until  the  Council  of 
Trent  ?  What  solid  reason  can  you  give  for 
administering  baptism  to  infants,  and  refusing 
them  the  communion  ?  Why  will  you  deceive 
yourselves? 

Reflect  seriously  upon  this  subject.  By 
the  baptism  which  you  administer  to  your 
infants,  you  follow  the  tradition  of  the  Romish 
church,  by  submitting  to  the  decree  of  one  of 
her  councils — that  of  Mela,  A.  D.  418  ;  and  in 
refusing  to  give  them  the  communion,  you 
still  submit  to  the  orders  of  the  church  of 
Rome,  who,  after  having  established  infant 
communion,  shortly  after  they  established 
infant  baptism,  in  the  fifth  century,  as  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  salvation,  did,  in  the  six- 
teenth century,  at  the  council  of  Trent,  con- 
voked by  order  of  the  pope,  decree  and  ordain, 
that  the  communion  should  no  longer  be 
administered  to  infants.  Tradition  upon  tra- 
dition !  Behold  to  what  absurdity  your  bap- 
tism of  new-born  babes  conducts  you  ! 

It  seems  to  me,  dear  friends,  that  it  would 
be  no  easy  matter  for  you  to  reply,  in  a  satis- 
factory manner,  to  all  these  questions.  Be 
then  <.*onsistent  "v^ith  yourselves.     You  have 


A  WORD   IN   PASSING. 


25 


abandoned  Rome  on  accoimt  of  her  traditions  ; 
retain  none  of  them  therefore,  not  even  the 
least.  Throw  off  these  rags  with  which  she 
has  clothed  you,  and  put  on  Jesus  Christ,  just 
as  his  holy  Word  directs  you. 

Do  you  wish  to  know  your  duty  ?  Permit 
me  to  show  it  to  you.  Are  you  truly  the 
disciples  of  Jesus  ?  Have  you  received  the 
precious  gift  of  faith?  Then  I  will  say  to 
you,  as  the  apostle  Peter  said  to  the  multi- 
tudes of  the  Jews  on  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
*'  Repent  and  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ,"  Acts  ii.  38 ;  or,  in  the  language  of 
the  disciple  Ananias  to  Paul,  "  And  nov^,  why 
tarriest  thou  ?  Arise  and  be  baptized,"  Acts 
xxii.  16. 

You  have  great  reason  for  gratitude  to 
God,  that  he  has  delivered  you  from  the  arts 
and  snares  of  "the  Man  of  Sin,"  and  that  he 
has  opened  your  eyes  to  enable  you  to  see 
the  glorious  light  of  his  holy  gospel.  Why 
should  you  suffer  yourself  still  to  be  held  in 
the  nets  of  tradition,  to  hinder  you  freely 
walking  in  the  new  path  in  which  God,  in  his 
infinite  mercy,  has  placed  your  feet  ?  Why 
will  you  shut  your  eyes,  so  as  not  to  see  the 


26 


A  WORD   IN   PASSING. 


light,  and  thus  expose  yourself  to  wander  in 
the  dark  labyrinth  of  infant-baptism.  _ 

Was  it  not  the  church  of  Rome,  who,  in 
the  ages  of  ignorance  and  superstition,  in- 
vented this  new  kind  of  baptism,  which  she 
administers  to  new-born  babes,  with  the  design 
of  snatching  them  from  eternal  condemnation . 
The   church  of  Rome  does  not  conceal  it. 
She  openly  avows  it.     It  is  by  means  of  tra- 
dition that  she  has  established  this  innovation; 
and  you,  you   are  content   to  give   it  your 
sanction.     No  pedobaptist,  unless  one  who  is 
either  crossly  ignorant  or  strongly  prejudiced, 
.vill  attempt  to  prove  infant  baptism  by  the 
Holy  Scriptures.     The  most  celebrated  pedo- 
baptist authors  candidly  confess  that  tradition 
is  the  only  basis  upon  which  their  doctrine 

fpsts 

Be  consistent  then,  and  reject  all  the  errors 
of  the  Romish  church,  or  be  sufficiently  honest 
and  intelligent,  not  to  pretend  to  rebel  against 
her  traditions,  and  yet  persist  in  retaining 
one  which  is  considered  by  the  Romish  church 
herself  as  one  of  the  most  important  and 
essential.  For,  in  truth,  infant  baptism  has 
been   the   source,  the  origin,  the  root— and 


A   WORD   IN   PASSING. 


27 


now  IS  the  base,  the  pillar,  and  the  foundation 
of  Popery. 

Believe  not  what  men  tell  you ;  but  rather 
have  recourse  "  to  the  law  and  to  the  testi- 
mony; if  they  speak  not  according  to  this 
word,  it  is  because  there  is  no  light  in  them." 
Isaiah,  viii.  20 


APPENDIX. 


>«< 


The  great  question  of  the  present  day, 
between  genuine  Protestants  on  the  one  hand, 
and  Papists  and  Pusejites  on  the  other  is  this 
—Is  the  Bible  oniy  to  be  received  as  the  rule 
of  faith,  or  the  Bible  and  Tradition  together  ? 
Is  no  doctrine  to  be  received,  unlcs°s  it  is 
found  in  the  Bible;  or  may  a  doctrine  be 
received  on  the  authority  of  tradition,  when 
it  is  confessedly  not  there  ? 

A  few  years  since  the  Rev.  Dr.  Fook  a 
distinguished  advocate  of  the  semi-papistie 
theology  of  Oxford,  now  known  by  the  name 
of  Puseyism,  preached  a  sermon  in  the  city 
of  London,  in  the  course  of  which  he  argued 
as  follows,  "you  know,  my  hearers,  that  the 
Bible  says  nothing  whatever  of  the  baptism 
of  infants;  if  then,  you  reject  the  autho- 
rity of  tradition,  how  can  you  account  for 
infant  baptism  ?     With  what  consistency  can 


:3 


A   AVORD   IN   PASSING. 


29 


you  receive  this  doctrine,  as  you  do,  without 
a  question,  and  reject  other  doctrines,  which 
are  established  upon  premely  the  same  foun- 
dation  T' 

Now  we  maintain  that  the  argument  of  the 
Puseyite  preacher  was  a  sound  one ;  for  the 
design  of  Dr.  Hook  was,  not  to  pull  down 
infant  baptism,  but  to  build  up  tradition;  and 
in  strict  accordance  with  the  preceding  argu- 
nient  of  Dr.  C6te,  we  may  enquire-if  one 
doctrine  be  received  upon  the  authority  of 
tradition,  why  not  the  others  ?  why  not  all 
the  doctrines  of  Oxford  or  of  Rome  ? 

It  has  been  remarked  on  a  preceding  page, 
that  the  Baptist,  in  arguing  with  a  Papist, 
enjoys  an  immense  advantage  over  his  Pfedo 
baptist   brother.      For   if    the   latter   should 
accuse  the  priest  of  Rome  of  adding  to  the 
word  of  God,  and  of  receiving  the  doctrine  of 
the  I  ope's  supremacy,  indulgences,  relics,  and 
other  absurdities,  upon  the  mere  authority  of 
tradition,  the  Papist  may  retort,  and  often 
has  retorted,  with  irresistible  force—"  if  you 
condemn   these  doctrines,  because   they   are 
received   upon    the   traditions   of   the   Holy 

3*  ^ 


30 


A    WORD    IN   PASSING. 


Catholic  Church,  let  me  ask  jou  one  question 
— ivhere  do  you  get  your  infant  baptism  T' 

As  an  illustration  of  this  advantage  enjoyed 
by  the  Baptist  over  the  Pajdobaptist  in  argu- 
ing with  the  Roman  Catholic,  we  will  append 
to  this  little  treatise,  the  following  account  of 
a  somewhat  amusing  conversation  which  oc- 
curred a  few  years  ago,  between  the  well- 
known  Baptist  missionary,  Rev.  Eugenie  Kin- 
caid,  and  a  Jesuit  professor.  The  account 
is  given  from  the  pen  of  Mr.  Kincaid  himself, 
and  was  written  on  board  of  a  steamboat  on 
the  Ohio. 

"There  is,"  says  Mr.  Kincaid,  "a  French 
Jesuit  priest— a  professor  of  languages  in  a 
Popish  college  in  Kentucky— on  board  the 
boat  with  me. 

'^  Sitting  in  my  state  room,  with  a  small 
Bible  in  my  hand,  the  Jesuit  came  along,  and 
very  politely  inquired  what  book  I  had.  Being 
informed,  he  said,  in  the  most  bland  and  win- 
ning manner,  'Good,  good,'  and  then,  for 
some  minutes,  went  on  describing  the  glory 
and  perpetuity  of  the  church— all  the  while 
fixing  his  dark  and  piercing  eye  on  me,  as  if 
he  would  read  my  inmost  soul. 


A   WORD    IN    PASSIXG. 


31 


II 


"  The  great  and  cardinal  dogma  of  popery, 
infallibility  in  morals  and  religion,  at  length 
showed  itself;  and  then  he  appealed  to  me  if 
I  did  not  feel  the  importance  of  having  an 
infallible  guide.  '  Certainly,'  I  replied ;  ^'  the 
reason  of  man  utterly  fails  in  being  a  safe 
guide  in  religion.'  'Good,  good,'  exclaimed 
the  Jesuit ;  'you  will  be  a  Catholic  yet.' 

''  Opening  my  Bible,  I  said,  '  Here  is  my 
infallible    guide    in     morals     and    religion.' 
'  Very  good,  very  good,'  rejoined  the  Jesuit ; 
'but   who    shall    be   the   interpreter   of    the 
Bible?'      'Do    you    take    Luther?'       'No.' 
'Do   you    take    Calvin?'      'No.'      'Do   you 
take   Arlus   and    Socinus  ?'      'No.'      'Well, 
you   take  Wesley  then?'     'No;  I   take  the 
Bible,  and  utterly  reject  all  human  authority.' 
"  '  You  make  yourself  wiser  than  Calvin  or 
Luther.     You  must  be  a  very  great  man,  and 
have  a  very  good  opinion  of  yourself.'     'No; 
I  have  so  good  an  opinion  of  the  Bible,  and 
such  confidence  in  the  wisdom  of  Paul,  and 
Peter,  and  John,  that  their  authority  is  every 
thing    to    me.'     'Good,    good,'    replied    the 
Jesuit;  'I  see  you  will  be  right  yet.     Did 
not  Christ  say  to  his  church,  I  will  be  with 


•h\ 


m 


32 


A   WORD   IX   PASSING. 


you  always,  to  the  end  of  the  worhl  ?  And 
when  the  Apostles  died,  did  they  not  have 
successors ;  and  was  not  Christ  with  them, 
and  then  with  their  successors  ?  and  so  on  in 
the  third,  and  fourth,  and  fifth  centuries  ?  Did 
not  Christ  speak  truth — I  will  be  with  you, 
even  to  the  end  of  the  world?  There  was 
only  the  one  Catholic  church  for  the  first  four 
or  five  hundred  years,  and  is  not  the  Catholic 
church  the  same  now  as  it  was  then  ?  And  do 
you  not  see,  as  in  Oxford,  the  most  learned 
Protestants  in  the  world  are  going  back  to  the 
Apostolic  church  ?' 

"'True,'  I  replied,  'the  Apostles,  as  Chris- 
tians, had  successors;  but,  as  Apostles,  they 
had  no  successors.  In  the  early  ages  there 
were  false  Apostles  and  false  Christs,  and 
they  deceived  many.  So  Paul  wrote — Let 
no  man  deceive  you  by  any  means ;  for  there 
shall  come  a  falling  away,  and  that  man  of 
sill  be  revealed,  the  son  of  perdition,  who 
opposeth  and  exalteth  himself  above  all  that 
is  called  God,  or  that  is  worshipped  ;  so  that 
he,  as  God,  sitteth  in  the  temple  of  God, 
showing  himself  that  he  is  God.  And  in 
another  place — for  the  time  will  come  when 


A   WORD   IN   PASSING. 


33 


they  will  not  endure  sound  doctrine ;  but  after 
their  own  lusts  shall  they  heap  to  themselves 
teachers  having  itching  ears ;  and  they  shall 
turn  away  their  ears  from  the  truth,  and  shall 
be  turned  unto  fables.' 

" '  Hence  the  oft-repeated  command  of  Christ, 
— He  that  hath  an  ear  to  hear  let  him  hear 
—what  ?  What  Popes  and  Cardinals  have 
said  ?  What  councils  have  decreed  ?  What 
Prelates  and  Doctors  have  written  ?  No  such 
thing.  Christ  says—Let  him  hear  what  the 
Spirit  saith  unto  the  churches.  Here  is  the 
infallible  guide ;  the  teachings  of  the  Spirit— 
and  these  teachings  make  up  the  word  of  God. 
Those  who  hold  fast  the  doctrine  of  Christ 
are  the  true  successors  of  ;he  Apostles ;  and 
there  have  been  such  in  all  ages,  since  the 
resurrection  of  Christ,  and  to  them  is  fulfilled 
that  promise— Lo  I  am  with  you  always, 
even  unto  the  end  of  the  world.' 

'' '  Do  not  all  the  Protestants  talk  in  this 
way?'  exclaimed  the  Jesuit;  'and  are  there 
not  forty  different  kinds  of  Protestants  in 
America,  and  how  can  any  one  tell  which  is 
right.' 

.    /^'Many,'    I   replied,    *  calling    themselves 


34 


A   WORD   IN    PASSING. 


t 


Protestants,  broke  off  from  the  Roman  church, 
and  brought  along  more  or  less  of  the  dogmas 
of  that  church.  The  lloman  church  has  made 
up  her  creed  partly  from  Christianity,  partly 
from  Judaism,  and  partly  from  Paganism; 
and  now  many,  leaving  Paganism  behind,  still 
blend  together  Judaism  and  Christianity.— 
Hence,  even  until  this  day,  when  Moses  is 
read,  (as  authoritative  in  religion)  the  vail  is 
upon  their  heart.  To  this  source  may  be  traced 
nearly  all  the  errors  of  pious  Protestants.' 

'''Is  it  not  a  little  remarkable,'  said  the 
Jesuit,  '  that  the  only  two  dogmas  in  the 
support  of  which  the  Catholic  church  depends 
entirely  on  tradition  the  Protestants  have 
adopted— the  change  of  the  Sabbath,  and  the 
baptism  of  infants?  [N'ow,  you  cannot  prove 
from  your  Bible  that  the  Sabbath  was  changed, 
or  that  infants  were  to  be  baptized.' 

"Very  well,"  I  replied,  ''I  hold  to  nothing 
but  what  is  clearly  taught  in  the  Bible.  I 
keep  the  first  day  of  the  week  because  the 
first  Christians  observed  it,  and  there  is  no 
evidence  that  they  met  together  on  any  other 
day  for  Christian  worship.  That  the  disciples 
met  together  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  to 


A   WORD    IN   PASSING. 


85 


engage  in  acts  of  Christian  worship,  and  that 
they  designed  to  meet  on  the  first  in  prefer- 
ence to  any  other  day,  and  that  it  was  sane- 
tioned  by  Paul,  is  a  recorded   fact.     Here, 
tnen,   I  stand   on  Apostolic  ground.'     ^  You 
must  prove,  then,'  said  the  Jesuit,  ^that  the 
command  in  the  decalogue  is  repealed.'     'No 
—that  command  stands,  and  is  as  binding  on 
me    as    it  was   on    the   primitive   Christians. 
Six  days   Shalt   thou  labor,   but   the  seventh 
day  is   the  Sabbath   of  the  Lord    thy   God. 
The  disciples,  in  the  days  of  Paul,  labored  six 
days  in  the  week  ;  but  no  more.     On  the  first 
day  in   the  week,  they  met  together  in  their 
Christian  assemblies.     Here,  then,  is  Divine 
authority  for  meeting    together  on   the  first 
day  of  the  week  for  Christian  worship.' 

^''Yes,'  said  the  Jesuit,  'you  do  read  in 
your  Bible  that  the  Christians  came  together 
on  the  first  day  of  the  week  to  break  bread; 
but  7J0U  cannot  find  in  your  Bible  that  the 
Apostles  baptized  infants,— ihk  you  have  got 
from  the  Catholic  church,  and  yet  you  abuse 
the  Catholic  church  for  depending  on  tradi- 
tion. How  can  you  say  my  Bible  alone  is 
my  rule,  and  then  baptize  infants  ?" 


36 


A   AVORD   IN    PASSING. 


''  Very  true,  sir,"  was  the  triumphant  reply 
of  Mr.  Kincaid,  a  reply  which  none  but  a 
Baptist  could  have  made,  ''  very  true,  there 
is  no  Divine  authority  for  infant  baptism,  it 
is  based  only  on  tradition^  and  so  /  reject  it 
altogether.  Infant  baptism  is  the  offspring 
of  a  Judaizing  spirit,  and  betrays  great  igno- 
rance of  the  true  character  of  a  Christian 
church, — through  its  influence  whole  nations, 
without  reference  to  character,  are  brought 
into  the  church.  I  regard  infant  baptism,  in 
its  practice  or  tendency,  as  one  of  the  worst 
dogmas  of  Popery.  Let  it  be  taken  from  the 
system,  and  believers'  baptism  be  restored, 
and  the  whole  superstructure  of  Rome  will 
crumble  dovfn." 

The  Jesuit  priest  soon  found  that  he  had 
more  than  his  match  in  the  unpretending  Bap- 
tist minister,  whom  he  had  striven  to  convert 
to  the  dogmas  of  Rome;  and  that  it  was  no  use 
arguing  longer  with  one  who  denied  in  toto 
the  authority  of  tradition,  and  built  his  faith 
upon  the  Bible  only  ;  and  therefore,  with 
his  dark  piercing  eyes  flashing  inquisitorial 
fire,  he  retired  from  the  controversy,  leaving 
Mr.  Kincaid  to  his  own  reflections. 


in 


\ 


|l0me  against  t\t 


AND  THE  BIBLE  AGAINST  ROME: 

Or,  Pharisaism,  Je-wish    and  Papal. 

BY  WM.  S.  PLUMER,  D.  D. 
18mo.     129  pages.     PRICE  25  CENTS.  * 


From  the  Christian  Chronicle. 


"  Thi8  little  volume  is  from  the  pen  of  a  most  able  and  accom- 
plish<!d  scholar.  Dr.  Plumer,  of  Baltimore,  has  but  few  equals  as 
an  impressive  preacher,  or  a  vigorous  writer.  lie  is  entirely  at 
home  with  the  nature,  history,  and  results  of  the  papal  religion, 
and  in  this  book  has  presented  the  subject  before  the  public  in  a 
masterly  manner.  It  will  di  good  in  the  family,  and  especially 
in  the  Sabbath  School  Library." 

From  the  Christian  Secretary. 

"  It  shows  in  a  clear  and  precise  manner,  what  Pharisaism  was 
among  the  Jews,  and  that  Pharisaism  among  the  Papists  goes 
beyond  it.  It  also  shows  the  hostility  of  popery  to  the  general 
circulation  of  the  Word  of  God— that  this  opposition  is  unscrip- 
tural  and  unreasonable,  and  is  condemned  by  the  voice  of 
antiquity.  It  concludes  with  an  a^ldress  to  Romish  priests,  to 
private  members  of  the  Romish  church,  and  to  Protestants." 

From  the  New  York  Baptist  Register. 

"The  writer  shows  clearly  that  Catholics  are  scarcely  more 
favorable  to  the  Douay  version  than  to  any  other,  and  that  their 
opposition  is  to  the  Bible  itself." 

From  the  Presbyterian  Banner. 
"This  little  volume  is  admirably  condensed,  and  filled  with 
solid  matter  in  the  author's  usual  effective  manner.  *  *  It  will 
repay  the  labor  of  several  perusals." 

From  the  Presbyterian. 

"The  kind  of  book  which  should  be  placed  in  the  hands  of 
general  readers,  who  wish  to  ascertain  the  true  features  of 
Popery. 

Frmn  the  Episcopal  Becorder. 

"  A  pnccinct  and  ablf^  compendium  of  the  Protestant  view  on 
the  important  topic  its  title  indicates." 


lis  ARCH  STREET.  PIIILABELPTTTA. 


